₦airaland Forum

Here is my solution

NDSMELODY:
show your workings from the begining till end sir

shown

Very wrong

NDSMELODY:
p = [RE/R+b]^2

take square root of both sides

₹p = ₹[RE/R+b]^2

₹p = RE/R+b

cross multiply
₹p(R+b) = RE

open bracket and simplify

₹p*R + ₹p*b = RE

COLLECT LIKE TERMS

₹p*b = RE - ₹p*R

₹p*b = R(E-₹p)

.divide both sides by E-₹p

R = ₹p*b/E-₹p........



Note that ₹ stands for square root and * for multiplication sign.....good luck.

youngest85:
R = PR +PB/E

lol.. This is wrong

R =1/(2P) × [(E² - 2Pb) ± E(E² - 4Pb)^½]

This is great.. Hope to do this some day

It is perfect here in my area in Ibadan

Average of 18-21 hours light per day

Samonda/Agbowo axis, Ibadan, Oyo State

Mrshape:
Stay safe with Mr shape

Fynestboi olawalebabs Richiez laslasticlala
Try it I will post solution later

what is the answer?

Kbs468:
And my own story Here in Nigeria is saying #Hunger Is Bad
no amount is too small


#50

#100

#200

Help save a life Nairalanders!

I Haven't eaten for days now not to talk of the expensive Hepatitis drugs that I am on

I have been drinking water



Account number : 0 0 6 8 1 8 4 2 4 8

Account name : Kabiru Abdulazeez

Bank : Access / (Diamond)



No plan on how to even survive the forthcoming Ramadan

Thanks and God bless you richly as you extend your hand of fellowship towards My hunger plight inshallah.


You can even Help seek assistance in the outside world on my behalf and return same if successful or better still,

Help push this message to the front page

check your balance for a token

semiquaver:
please Sir can you show how you got it?

semiquaver:
Can someone help me solve this maths please. My nephew came to me with it.Thanks

x is 36°

Fact:
<A = < D = x ((base angles of isosceles triangle)
Also, <A = < D = <BCD = x

Let <ABC be y, therefore <BCD is also y (base angles of isosceles triangle)

From ∆ABC; y + y + x = 180°,
2y + x = 180° ............Eqn 1

From ∆BCD; x + x + (180° - y) = 180°,
y = 2x ......... Eqn 2

Put Eqn 2 in Eqn 1:
2(2x) + x = 180°,
5x = 180°,
x = 36°

semiquaver:
Can someone help me solve this maths please. My nephew came to me with it.Thanks

x is 36°

Fact:
<A = < D = x
Also, <A = < D = <BCD = x

Let <ABC be y, therefore <BCD is also y (base angles of isosceles triangle)

From ∆ABC; y + y + x = 180°,
2y + x = 180° ............Eqn 1

From ∆BCD; x + x + (180° - y) = 180°,
y = 2x ......... Eqn 2

Put Eqn 2 in Eqn 1:
2(2x) + x = 180°,
5x = 180°,
x = 36°

Goalnaldo:
well if you can be able to pay for your own internet subscription, house rent and other utility bills he might be interested, otherwise you would be chasing a lost cause.

lol

Neyozak:
The answer given here is an assumed or guess solution with no basis. That is the reason why I brought it here to cross fertilize idea with those not on that page before I say my own view here.
But I have a reservation that nobody is a paragon on knowledge!

no, it is not an assumed solution. Check the the thread very well. Mrshape did justice to it. He even uploaded a solved copy of his solution. Check again

Mr2kul:
Can you explain how come about the 6 in the third equation? I thought they were to have the same value.

check again.. The stick in the middle is doubled..

1stHooligan:
I salute

boss

Neyozak:
Solve for x with a logical proof!

we've solved this here.. Go to Nairaland maths clinic thread. Answer is 20°

https://www.nairaland.com/1147658/nairaland-mathematics-clinic/265#88040967

Taymi:
http://zzzscore.com/1to50/en/

The fastest person to finish this game within 30secs gets recharge card

Send a screenshot to proof when you’re done...

Game closes by 3pm
Good luck

lol.. Got 49.9

3 + 5 × 2(7) = 3 + 5 × 14 = 3 + 70 = 73


Answer is 73

Bigdaddy234:
Pls I need solutions

3 + 5 × 2(7) = 3 + 5 × 14 = 3 + 70 = 73


Answer is 73

Mrshape:
Alright
Are you a maths student or a maths professor

He lectures maths

mrphysics:
.

Whenever you take flight from a particular place to another, you have absorbed more ionizing radiations that someone living 20km from a nuclear power plant. When you take 1-9 cigarettes a day, you take same risk as someone who took a dose of 3.4Sv from a bomb blast.


The words of MrPhysics

You did very well. In fact, I've been planning to make a write up like this here but I don't have to bother myself again. Thank you.

But I have problem with the quited part of your write up above most especially linking cigeratte smoking to an exposure of 3.4Sv.. I don't think that is through..
Even for radiation workers, the occupational dose limit is 50mSv per annum (0.05 Sv) and not exceeding 20mSv (0.02 Sv) over a 5 years average..

So it is not possible for smokers to be exposed to 3.4 Sv for smoking just a few sticks of cigarette..
In fact, 3Sv of radiation exposure can kill (lethality). Threshold values for cataract, sterility, epilation etc are far less than 3.4 Sv..

iles199:
Prof Farai taught me Mechanics in part 1 and prof was so good he explained mechanics in a very simple term the class can understand. Taking the 201 of mechanics next session, I hope he as the current HOD of physics teach us again

The present HOD is Prof (Mrs) Ademola

Where is the video please.. Link?

cheango:
*Below are submissions of three professors of radiation physics in UI copied from Science Faculty platform to debunk the narratives in the trending audio on 5G*

*Dr Popoola*

The man who made this audio message can be likened to someone who is interpreting a strange language he has never studied. He does not know what he's saying.
In a simple language, the so called 5G (fifth generation) is a transmission at far higher frequency range than 4G. This feature implies transmission of greater quantum of energy (signal) per time, hence heavy data (such as images) will download faster and will be transmitted at higher resolution. Meanwhile this may require more booster antennas at closer ranges in order to travel very far because high frequency signals get attenuated faster than low frequency signals. In short 5G will be able to accommodate larger data than 4G.
Generally, people have always displayed some fear each time a new technology arose. The fear attributed to mobile technology is that the signals (waves) are injurious to humans. Meanwhile all mobile signals most fall within microwaves (extreme end of radio waves) which are non ionizing radiations. Ionizing radiations like x-rays and gamma rays have far higher frequencies and exposure to human body may be injurious. However are not used for mobile telecommunication.
The man's use of the word 'radioactive' reveals that he is completely ignorant of what he claims to be explaining. The word Radioactive is from Radioactivity which is a completely different phenomenon from radio wave. Technology is more than speculation. It is a product of basic scientific theories.

*Prof Farai:*

������I remain proud of you Tunde. Just look at the confidence with which he was talking nonsense. I was just wondering how I would present a rejoinder in a language that we will all understand and without sounding know it all. You have captured all with the appropriate words. It is now up to anybody to allow him/herself to be misled. God bless you richly, my brother.

*Prof Jibri:*
I really don't understand over stretching of a simple scientific matter. Simple basic physics which our Prof. Farai has laid to rest for us as a guru in Radiation business. Use E = hf from modern Physics and the frequencies or the wavelengths of the regions for the G's what amount of energy do you arrive at. Just like Prof. Farai said, mixing up non-ionizing radiation source to be Radioactive is a simple QED ignoramus!!


*Prof Farai*
I hope we will all understand the nonsense in this video from this simple explanation. Communication networks of whatever G, for now and in the near future, are generally in frequencies of the order of Giga Hertz (GHz or 10⁹ Hz). Thank God the video revealed this much. Meanwhile, the bulk of energy from the sun (solar radiation) is in the UV frequency range (i.e.10¹⁵ Hz). Now I ask, how can mankind, who has been bathing under the shower of UV radiation from the sun over the ages, now be under any threat of a radiation of energy over 1 million times less energy than UV radiation? That is one point.
Most importantly for us on this platform, there is no application of a technology that is not under any regulatory control by international bodies made up experts from all parts of globe. Most of us have one thing or the other to do with such bodies as WHO, ICNIRC, UNSCEAR, etc. If they are unaware of the fears expressed in this video or have been compromised, then we are all guilty. We should stop attending their programmes.

Those are my lecturers.. But Dr Popoola is not in radiation physics

Mrshape:
Because I got that before but when I solved again I got another thing, the solution is to long and am too lazy to check for errors

I used your approach (esp. the initial approach). But I didn't follow your steps.

mathefaro:
like I said earlier, you've made a lot of assumptions which you ought not to including the fact that those sides you labelled K are equal. I could also make some assumptions totally different from yours and get another answer. I still believe there's a piece missing from the question

those are not assumptions but facts.. We have 2 different isosceles triangles in that shape if you observe very well

Mrshape:
Here is the suggested solution

here I got x to be 20°

Insightful. I like your objectivity

ghanamichael247:
pls help me find the answer

3.5 + 4.5 = 8
+ +
9.5 - 3.5 = 6
|| ||
13 8

TheApologist:
oau certificates have no number

you're right

oazeez1991:
I don't tink dia is after final submission, as dey even designed it in a way dat, a Warning Message popup, informing applicants abt d need 4 dem not 2 be able 2 edit dia info afta finally submittin.

thank you